網站、手機是我們與外界互動的工具，同樣的，「理論知識」也是另一種我們認識 世界與聯繫世界的「工具」，對於網站、手機這些「工具」究竟要如何設計才會「好用」？ 大多數的理論都認為需要從「手機使用者」、「網站使用者」的觀點來加以評估。但為什 麼同樣作為我們認識世界的另一種工具 –理論，對於理論究竟能不能用、好不好用等 問題，卻很少有人從「理論使用者」的角度來思考？ 這種現象多少暗示著理論是一個客觀存在的有效知識，理論之所以不好用、或理論 不能用，可能是學生沒學好、老師沒教好、或是用錯理論，但不會是理論本身不好，事 實上，理論不好用，很可能是理論本身的限制過高、或是無法和其他理論銜接、甚至可 能是理論本身有缺陷。也就是說，如果理論是我們認識世界的地圖，當一個人使用地圖 卻找不到路的時候，可能是地圖的表達方式有問題。 事實上，任何一個意義系統，都應該同時包含「結構」與「行動」兩個相互建構的 面向，對於領域知識體系來說，這種二元性也就反映在理論的「表徵形式」和理論的「使 用經驗」兩面向上，它們分別代表「知識結構」和「知識行動」兩個相互建構的內涵， 而如何透過「行動/結構」交互檢驗的研究策略，更為精確的勾勒出傳播學門的知識地 圖，是本計畫的主要研究目。 本計畫首針對「理論使用者」的使用經驗進行分析，分別從「學習者」、「教學者」、 「研究者」、「工作者」四類的理論使用者，探討其各自再對理論的想像與使用理論的「行 動」困境。第二年則聚焦於理論的「表徵形式」分析，就既有的研究文獻與教科書中所 呈現的「結構」內涵進行探索，以掌握「傳播理論」在既有理論表徵系統中所展現的「本 體樣貌」，最後則融合「理論使用」與「理論本體」兩種取徑，勾勒一個融合「結構與 行動相互建構的傳播知識藍圖」。Websites, cell phones, these are two examples of the tools we use to interact with the world. Similarly, “theoretical knowledge” is another tool we use to know about and connect to the outside. How to design the tools like websites and cell phones to make them more “user-friendly”? Most of the theories agree that the evaluation should be made from the users’ point of view. However, why similar evaluation of theories and knowledge has never been considered about? Why are theory users’ needs seldom taken into consideration when we are discussing the usability and user-friendliness of theories, although theories are also tools for us to explore the world? To some extent, this phenomenon implicates that theory is “the effective knowledge that exists objectively”. It is difficult to use a theory, or it can hardly be used at all? It must be the fault of the students or the teachers, or they are completely using the wrong theory, but it will never be the fault of the theory itself. As a matter of fact, other possible explanations might be “there is too high a restriction when applying a certain theory”, or “this theory cannot integrate with other theories”, or it might be as simple as “there is a flaw in the theory”. In other words, if we consider theories as the map we use to explore the world but we fail to find the direction, it is possible that there are problems in the map. In fact, any meaning system should simultaneously include two mutual-constructive domains: “structure” and “action”. As to a knowledge system of some field, this duality will be reflected in the “representation system” and “user experiences” of the theory, which respectively echo to the characteristics of “knowledge structure” and “knowledge act”. And it is the purpose of this study to more accurately depict the knowledge map of communication field using a cross-examining research strategy of action/structure”. Firstly, this project analyzes the “theory user experiences”. “Learners”, “teachers”, “researchers” and “workers” are four types of theory users taken into consideration, whose imagination about the theory and dilemma in theory using, are thoroughly discussed. In the second year, the author focuses on the analysis of the theory’s “representation system”, and tries to explore the “structural” characteristics presented in existing research literatures and textbooks. This is an attempt to discover the “ontology” of communication theories in existing theoretical representation system. Finally, integrating “theory uses” and “theory ontology”, a “communication knowledge map mutually constructed by structure and act” will be depicted.